Search form

You are here

Hi, everybody is talking about the new edition, and a lot of us (users) is screaming is own ideas, but it's very hard to keep track of what everybody want, unless, we do it in a very organized way.

I want to do it, how?in this post i organize some of the major issues with new edition, i will keep the name of everyone who say something about this, with names and numbers will be easy to know more about our collective thinking (of course, we can't riassume every idea, so i decide (for the sake of the efficency) to realize a system without shading, you like something, you dislike it, or are not interested)

As general rule, i try to interpretate your ideas when you don't give me a precise answer, if i find an ambigue answer (like: "nice idea but wrong mechanic") i just skip that.also i read almost every answer, if i will find a third option that often reapeat itself, i will not proceed to add the third option, but i will update this post including some of your general thinking (intruduce a little change in the poll may bring chaos in the thread)

-In the parentesis there's the number of how many users made that choise-For every relevant Issue i will add a new paragraph

It depends. Are they actually going to support level 20 - 30 or is it going to be something in the theoretical distance like it was in 4E? If they support level 20 - 30 I'm all for it but they need to actually support it a lot more than 4E did. Otherwise don't bother outside of a splatbook or two.

powersgood (2) Lian, IASbad

vanciantsystemgoodbad (2) Lian, IAS

Class rolesgood (1) Lianbad (1) IAS

It really didn't accomplish much except for 99% of the party being strikers. No thanks. Every class should have a support, a controller, and a tough guy build.

magicitems has to be mechanically importantnot important (2) Lian, IAS

abilitiesscoresgood (2) Lian, IASbad

Under the clause that they matter a bit more than they do in 4E. Other than your 2 key abilities the other abilities generally don't matter for your character. I want the fact that my fighter has high charisma to matter in combat! Maybe make him better at feinting or giving leaderish effects or something. I dunno.

a lot of classesgood (1) Lianbad (1) IAS

I think there should be 3-5 main classes, but lots and lots of different themes, archetypes, and subclasses for those who want to be different.

a lot of racesgood (1) Lian, IASbad

More of the cool different things like Wilden, Shardmind, and Deva please. Less of the "WHOAOMG THOUSANDS OF ELVES/ELADRIN/DROW/HALF-ELVES/MOON ELVES/ASS ELVES, etc. And they need to be balanced. If Mearls can't keep his Dwarf bias out then keep him the hell away from design.

GENERAL THINKINGLEVEL: epic (21-30) level is good only if supported as other levels, otherwise is very badPOWERS/VANCIAN SYSTEM: mages should have at-will powers or at least be able to actively partecipate combat even at low levelsCLASS ROLES: good idea, but every "class/concept" should have more than one role, and they should be not too much bindingMAGIC ITEM AS TO BE MECHANICALLY important, but never necessary (to hit for example); the more important the items, the less you should have. Interesting items are better than "bonus to this or that". Also random item tables should be at least an optionCLASSES/RACES: if they will be a lot, support all of them, and make them specialFEATS (AND OTHER OPTIONS) THAT GIVES YOU STATIC +X BONUSES: semplicity sometimes is good, but seeems like nobody want taxes featsHEALING SURGES it's a good idea to let the party heal without the need of a cleric, but some people don't like how they workDEFENSES: some of the users suggest to use AC AND RESISTANCE, or make both options avaiableSKILL CHALLENGES: some loves them, some hates themNORMAL CHANCE TO HIT: 66%?SAVE OR DIE: generically "characters shouldn't die so easy" but hardcore option is not a bad idea, otherwise make them less likely to kill (adding more saving throw for example)

you may want to use this:LEVEL (as in, range of levels in the game) 1-201-30 POWERS (4e power mechanic) GOODBAD VANCIAN SYSTEM (3.x caster mechanic) (also 0e-1e-2e)GOODBAD CLASS ROLES (defender, controller, striker, leader)GOODBAD MAGIC ITEMS HAS TO BE MECHANICALLY (you want magic items to be almost necessary? a big part of the game?)IMPORTANTNOT IMPORTANT ABILITIES SCORES (str, con, dex, int, wis, cha)GOODBAD A LOT OF CLASSES (a dozen or more maybe)GOODBAD A LOT OF RACES (a dozen or more maybe)GOODBAD ABILITY SCORES ADJUSTMENT FOR RACES (you want a particolar race to be better with some classes and bad with others?)YESNO FEATS (AND OTHER OPTIONS) THAT GIVES YOU STATIC +X BONUSESGOODBAD HIT POINTSGOODBAD HEALING SURGES (part of 4e heal system)GOODBAD DEFENSESAS ACAS DAMAGE RESISTANCESKILL CHALLENGES (part of 4e system)GOODBADSKILLS HAVE TO BEIMPORTANTNOT IMPORTANTNORMAL CHANCE TO HIT (against an avarage monster of your level)50%MORE LIKE 75% ALIGNMENT IS (mechanical means there are powers/spells that work on what you write on your sheet, fluff means pure role play)MECHANICALFLUFF SAVE OR DIE (finger of death)GOODBAD

Powers: I think these were poorly handled, but I'll abstain, because...

Vancian System: Bad.

Class Roles: Too binding. While some understanding of "What do I want to do mechanically?" is needed, having Class X be Role Y was confining. I'd prefer a freedom of builds. Call it a wash from me

Magic items should NOT be mechanically required.

Ability scores are good

A Lot of Classes... bad. Release with sub 10 classes and a lot of options to transform those classes to fulfill various roles and archetypes

A lot of races: Define "lot". 6-8 seems good to me for release, but there is AMPLE room for expansion.

Ability Scores for races: Good

Feats that grant +X: BAD BAD BAD! Feats should be nice, not necessary.

HP: Good

Healing Surges: Call it a wash. Healing surges need to be handled very carefully. I love what they do for clerics, but dislike what they do for combat and the more grokkable "hp as wounds" conceit.

Defenses: Yes? Avoidance (AC) and Mitigation (DR) both have their places.

Skill Challenges: I don;t know enough about how these play out in a real game to comment, but they've sounded like a very nice.

Skills should be important.

Normal Chance to Hit: 66% (2/3) sounds like a good average for "heroic" characters. 50% is annoyingly low, but at 75% I think the perception of misses would become far more unfavorable and anger-inducing.

Alignment is Fluff

Save or Die: Optional rules. Plenty of people don't want to play a game where there's constant tension about a character's survival and they WILL die at some point, which tends to happen when survival can come down to a single die roll versus disintegrate, wail of the banshee, or what not. Save or Die attacks change the feel of the game to one that's less straight heroic and more gritty or rough and tumble, and can make players feel powerless when their hit points and defenses get straight up ignored. Of course, when the players get access to the same effects, they tend to feel cheated by the "save" aspect of "save or die" (though if they have a consolation prize on sucessful save like 3.0's Disintegrate, they can still be winners). Overall, I'd leave Save or Die out of the default rules set but include the option on release for adding it in "If you want to play a game centered around struggling for survival, consider the addition of the "Save or Die" system. Under this system, the following spells and special attacks become instantly lethal on a failed save. On a successful save, they are unchanged ... (list) ... Since both players and enemies can now be slain without regard to their current status, gaming sessions are liable to be far more tense, expecially at high level."

a lot of raceswhatever, but balance the impact, no"uber" race or "all paladins must be x or y race"

ability scores for racesyes

feats (and other options) that gives you static +x bonusesmeh

hit pointsgood, dnd without HP?

healing surgesbad

defensesI like 4e's AC/Will/Reflex/whatever system, actually.

skill challengesgood

skills has to beimportant, I would want a skills system rather than a powers system

normal chance to hitmore like 75% (between 60-75)

Alignment isFluff, but important fluff for acutally Roleplaying, rather than roll-playing

Save or Diebad

My ideal system would maybe not be realized as DnD, but would give skill trees to each class based on their power source/role. As you level, you would be able to combine these skills into creative ways to deal with challenges. Starting level characters would mirror old standbys: Wizards might start with Magical Damage, Magical Regeneration, and Magical Defense. Warriors might start with Weapon, Armor, and Taunt skills. Rouges might start with Weapon, Stealth, and Tinker skills. Clerics might start with Divine Healing, Weapon, and Armor skills.Mid-Level characters would be flexing their skills in empowring ways. Wizards might weave acidic fireballs, or build fantastical companions. Warriors would be manipulating fights like a drunken master, or slowing down time, itself, with their practiced martial fluidity. Rogues might be leaping into combat for devestating damage, only to disappear again, or sneaking into the enemy's lair undetected to get the lay of the land. Clerics might be summoning forces of nature to their aid or keeping their companions alive in the most inhospitable of situations.High-level characters would be masters of the universe, twisting the very farbic of reality, or figting against those who seek to do so. Maybe high-level warriors and rogues could learn skills for shrugging off or otherwise combatting magical effects. I dunno, I've only really been thinking about this for 20 hours or so now.

Level1-20 - epic level can come later and at that time they can actually focus on that instead of major holes being overlooked because they're trying to cover 30 levels of material at once.

powersgood - more work can be done with them to differentiate between classes (like having fighters have all reliable maneuvers or stances as opposed to the mage's spells) but the idea is sound.

vanciantsystembad - vancian magic didn't really depict anything that most people were familiar with and wasn't flexible enough to adapt to fit other standard magical tropes.

Class rolesgood - at least the idea that each class should have a certain purpose that it fills (having secondary roles that can be played up with the right build is fine too). That doesn't mean that it has to be 4e roles, but each class should have a focus, and its focus and intent should be made clear to the players.

magicitems has to be mechanically not important - no more +x please

abilitiesscoresgood - but get rid of modifiers. It's too confusing for new players and every change in the score should matter, not just every other one.

a lot of classesno vote, it really depends on how classes are handled. Versatile classes could replace the need for a hundred specific classes, but too much freedom loses focus.

a lot of racesgood - races are simple to make and don't create as much bloat as full classes, so why not.

ability scores for racesyes

feats (and other options) that gives you static +x bonusesbad - no more static bonus feats or patch feats please

hit pointsgood - that's one sacred cow that just isn't going away, plus they are simple and straightforward.

healing surgesgood

defensesboth - I would like the option to either build to be harder to hit or the guy that gets hit all the time but like an Abrams tank just keeps going.

skill challengesgood - they need some modification, mainly to their presentation, but its a good concept

skills has to beup to the DM? in a rules light game, the DM might just use ability checks for everything. In a more advanced game he might have skills.

normal chance to hiteither one is fine just so long as combat ends up speeding up a bit

Alignment isFluff

Save or Diebad

For this new 5th edition i also suggest a lot a modularity, here's some i suggestion: snip

----I'm all for modularity but what you suggest is to turn D&D into a classless system. It has never been that, and I don't think that's what most fans want. There are plenty of classless systems out there already. Classes should provide focus so new players aren't wandering all over the place with their abilities not knowing what they are supposed to do, make character creation easier by not overwhelming players with choices, and maintain balance by reducing opportunities to min/max and keeping everyone's abilities within a reasonable range of each other.

Owner and Proprietor of the House of Trolls.
God of ownership and possession.

you are right, classless system is dangerous in some ways, i was just suggesting more freedom (classes remove a bit of freedom and guide you through levels)

but 4th edition classes are too much closed...

@Alli skipped some of your votes because i wasn't sure of what you really want to say, i apologize but i prefer to keep a "black and white" status, evoiding grey areas

@ChaosStormmagicitems has to be mechanically no clue what this means

this means: do you want magical items to be kind of necessary for play? (like now, without a magic weapon ad higher level it's very hard to hit)or do you prefer flavored not-necessary magic items that add something to your character withouth cause him to depend on them

LEVEL--1-30Having more levels should mean you level more often, which gives you that cool "ooh I leveled!" feeling more often. Personally my campaigns will last the same amount of time either way, so if the players get more chances to have that cool feeling and get new crunch to play with, sounds good to me.

POWERS--GoodI'm kinda torn on this one, as I really do understand the argument against powers, but when it comes down to it, I like the idea. I think it needs a lot of work, but it's the right sort of track to take, because it means you can give interesting options to every class in a defined system. Powers for different classes/power sources should work very differently(things like how psionics in 4e is very different), however, to avoid the somewhat homogenized classes of PHB1.

VANCIAN SYSTEM--BadThe Vancian casting system as a whole never really made sense to me. Pretty much any other casting system I think would be better. I did like having the slight nod to it with 4e Wizards having spellbooks, but the full system itself is something I'm glad to see gone.

CLASS ROLES--GoodThe classes of every edition have had roles whether they were pointed out or not, and actively pointing them out is helpful to new players. Should there be classes that can switch roles, sub certain roles and main certain roles, or have options that blur the lines a bit? Absolutely. But trying to take them away entirely is a poor idea, because at its core it would make every class jack-of-all-being terrible at everything.

MAGIC ITEMS HAVE TO BE MECHANICALLY...--ImportantApparently(unless the first post hasn't been updated) I'm the only one that thinks this. Now, don't get me wrong, I think the inclusion of alternate rewards instead of magic items/inherent bonuses/etc is a great idea. But this is D&D, and I want my +5 flaming sword. If there could be an alternate system where things were totally balanced around having none of these bonuses at all(so a compensatory thing like inherent bonuses wasn't necessary), that'd be fine, but it'd be a lot of additional work compared to something like inherent bonuses, and if there has to be a default, I prefer my +whatever items. I do like that they toned it down to just the three slots in 4e, though. Not EVERYTHING has to be a +X.

ABILITY SCORES--Good99% of the tabletop RPGs I've seen has these in some form, and for good reason. They work really, really well.

A LOT OF CLASSES--Bad(?)I suppose this depends on what you define as "a lot". I don't want 37 classes in my game. I do, however, want PHB1 to have 8-10ish classes in it. My main reasoning for this is that if you keep adding classes, it becomes hard for people to keep up with it. Adding additional variants to existing classes is easier to work with and means new content will have some existing basis in the game. Certain concepts can't really be done right with existing classes, I know, so sometimes you have to add new ones. I'd just prefer it be limited. Heroes of the Feywild is a brilliant example of this, IMO: 4 fun new class ideas that are all variants of existing classes.

A LOT OF RACES--Bad(?)Again, depends on what constitutes "a lot". Like with classes, I'd like to see 8-10ish races in PHB1. Also, I don't want to quash options in this area, but I want to races to have a real, significant impact. The more different races you add, the harder this becomes to accomplish. I love things like racial feats, racial utility powers, racial paragon paths, and the like, but not every 4e race was created equal with these things. I'd rather have fewer races that were better supported than more races. I'm all for having a "for players" section on vaguely playable monster races in monster manuals, perhaps with Dragon magazine support later to flesh them out more, however.

ABILITY SCORES FOR RACES--YesIf the big, burly race has the exact same range of strength scores as the halflings, that makes no sense. The way 4e did ability scores for races(one primary +2 and one either/or +2) was great, I see no reason to change it.

FEATS(AND OTHER OPTIONS) THAT GIVE YOU STATIC +X BONUSES--BadThe main source of feat tax, power creep, and old material becoming worthless in general is feats that have a +X. I'd rather feats gave me cool new options or changed the way some of my abilities work somehow instead of just a +X.

HIT POINTS--GoodPlease, please, PLEASE have the rules explicitly stress that hit points are an abstract system, not a literal record of how wounded you are. For a heroic fantasy game, this abstract record of how much fighting capacity you have left works great, as opposed to a more specific system of injuries and wound levels and such. I also do love the bloodied mechanic, so please keep that as well.

HEALING SURGES--GoodI like the overall concept of healing surges, as to me they represent your overall capacity for exertion and toughness for a period of adventuring--while you might be momentarily overwhelmed(your hit points hit zero), you can bounce back and keep fighting because the wounds aren't overall that bad, because you have surges left. Everyone has limits, though, and you reach those limits when your surges run out. The idea of second winds and nonmagical healing sort of keys off of this idea too, so I like that as well.

DEFENSES--As ACThis is kind of a sacred cow, but it's one I like. It also cuts down on the number of rolls per attack, and removes the disappointing "You hit! ...and deal no damage" from the majority of combats, since it only comes up with things that resist specific damage types now. I would be totally ok with a scaling system of getting a bonus to damage related to how much you beat the defense by, however. It is kinda lame to roll a super high attack roll and then brick your damage.

SKILL CHALLENGES--GoodOne of the best parts of 4e, though the mechanics need serious work--I've somewhat kludged together my own system for figuring out DCs and numbers of successes and failures, and it works pretty well. The basic idea I've kept intact, however. While I don't think we need mechanics for everything that isn't combat, it helps define the game as more than just a combat game and lets mechanics come into play in noncombat situations, which is something I like. Yes, you should roleplay through your tense negotiation with the Baron(or what have you), but shouldn't your character's actual abilities matter too? That's why you took Diplomacy, isn't it? When you've rolled a few skill checks over the course of such a scene, you've basically just done a skill challenge. Why not codify the rules for it a little more?

SKILLS HAVE TO BE--ImportantSee above rant. If skills aren't important to the game, why even have them?

NORMAL CHANCE TO HIT--50% as now50% is fine. As long as big awesome things like Daily powers have things like reliable and "on-miss" conditions, 50% doesn't bother me. If you hit too often, you need to give opponents more HP to compensate, and this makes combat drag on when people start getting unlucky on damage or hit rolls. Also, hitting too often becomes too powerful when hits have rider conditions like dazed or immobilized. Missing does suck, but as long as defenses are balanced so appropriate level encounters see hit rates of about 40-60% and not 5-95% like it seems to be now, I don't see the problem.

ALIGNMENT IS--MechanicalTruth be told, I think alignment is both mechanical and fluff. I say mechanical because there's one key thing about alignment mechanics I want--holy, unholy, axiomatic, and anarchic effects. I loved having certain things like that affect people differently because of alignment. Alignment should not, however, restrict things like class choice(let my Paladins go!). It should also not be a straitjacket defining your character--you define how the character acts, and THAT determines his alignment, not the other way around. Of course, DMs need to be watchful for characters acting out to change their alignment for their own benefit, but any DM worth their salt should be able to do that just fine.

Oh, and bring back the 9-alignment grid! The new alignment system in 4e sucks something awful, and it was the very first thing I houseruled away.

SAVE OR DIE--BadA single, isolated unlucky roll shouldn't immediately screw your character. That's really hard on the player and just as hard on the DM, as now he has to contrive a way for the PC to get out of death or whatever other equally impossible predicament it is, or figure out how to introduce a new character into his ongoing story. Giving players more chances to avoid these horrible fates is a better idea. Will people still die(or the like) and have to deal with the aforementioned consequences? Yeah, they will. But this makes it less common, and less frustrating.

LEVEL 1-30POWERS GOODVANCIANT SYSTEM BADCLASS ROLES GOOD MAGIC ITEMS HAS TO BE MECHANICALLY NOT IMPORTANT ABILITIES SCORES BADA LOT OF CLASSES BAD A LOT OF RACES BADABILITY SCORES FOR RACES NOFEATS (AND OTHER OPTIONS) THAT GIVES YOU STATIC +X BONUSES BAD HIT POINTS GOOD HEALING SURGES GOOD DEFENSES AS ACSKILL CHALLENGES GOOD SKILLS HAS TO BE IMPORTANT NORMAL CHANCE TO HIT 50% AS NOW ALIGNMENT IS FLUFF SAVE OR DIE BAD

The whole 'modular' aproach is a terrible idea. The fatal flaw to a 'something for everyone' customizeable aproach is that complexity is one of those things that divides the RPG community. Some tollerate it, some highly value simplicity. A system where you 'choose the level of complexity' /is complex/, it fails out the gate.

There have been successful systems that take highly customizeable or highly modular aproaches. They've been called 'universal' or 'multi-genre' or simply 'core' systems. Hero System and GURPS are probably the best exaples. These systems apeal to really serious gamers who want to master a very complex system and turn it to a wide variety of genres and campaigns - because, well, the game /a lot/. That's actually a pretty small niche, as the relative popularity of those two systems compared to far less customizeable ones - like D&D - attests.

Oops, looks like this request tried to create an infinite loop. We do not allow such things here. We are a professional website!

LEVELNo vote.POWERSGood.VANCIAN SYSTEMBad, though obviously there does need to be some kind of limit on how much powerful magic can be used. CLASS ROLESBad. Not that roles themselves are bad, but I think classes should have more flexibility to determine which role they want to fill.MAGIC ITEMS Not mechanically important. Having a large party I prefer inherent bonuses to avoid giving out piles of magic items in every dungeon room just to keep things balanced.ABILITIES SCORESGood. In addition to being mechanically relevent these can provide interesting roleplaying hooks.A LOT OF CLASSESGood, but with the caveat that they should all be supported. A LOT OF RACESGood. I like more player options.ABILITY SCORES FOR RACESGood. Helps reinforce the logic of traditional archetypes, but is not so significant that playing against type is impossible. FEATS (AND OTHER OPTIONS) THAT GIVES YOU STATIC +X BONUSESBad. Typically very mechanically advantageous, but uninteresting.HIT POINTSGood. HEALING SURGESGood, at least compared to older editions that potentially required weeks of rest to heal up. Possibly less realistic, but I think its more fun. DEFENSESGood. SKILL CHALLENGESBad. I definitely think skills should be important, but I don't like the idea of, "Oh, its a skill challenge. Don't bother trying creative solutions, just pick your best skill and go."SKILLS Should be important, but should supplement in game problem solving rather than replacing it.NORMAL CHANCE TO HIT75% (roughly).ALIGNMENT ISFluff. SAVE OR DIEBad. Poor choices might put a PC in a situation where a single roll determines life or death, but I don't think the system should encourage this mechanic.

This smells of design by comittee. Most of these decision points only make sense as a coherent system, not a checklist. At best, this can give some indication of player preference, but this shouldn't be base for design...

LEVELI've never played anything beyond Paragon, but it's nice as an option for those who like it. I'd keep Epic it in a separate sourcebook, though.

POWERSI like the format, and I've never been in the "OMG my fighter cast spells" camp.

VANCIAN SYSTEMEven though its widely unpopular, it's actually a pretty easy and straightforward game mechanic - pick your spells, cross them off when cast. The problem really was that low-level wizards were useless, and high-level wizards were gods. Vancian magic could work if Wizards had 2-3 at-will magic attacks, 4-5 daily spells to prepare (with power dependend on class level), and rituals for the off-combat magic. Which is pretty close to what 4th ed did.

CLASS ROLESThe combat roles (Striker, Defender, Controller, Leader) were a good introduction to 4th edition (late 3.5 edition, in fact...) However, there should be options within a class, as later 4th ed material did. For example, there would be a Striker (= Slayer), Defender (=Knight) and Leader (= Warlord) path within the Fighter.

MAGIC ITEMS HAS TO BE MECHANICALLYHunting magic items has always been a big part of D&D. However, stuff like Longsword +5 is bland and boring. Look at Earthdawn how magic items can be handled in a much more epic (as in storytelling) fashion.

ABILITY SCORESHow do you do without them?

A LOT OF CLASSESA LOT OF RACES... will happen sooner or later with splatbooks.

ABILITY SCORES FOR RACESAmong other things. I'd like to see racial themes and powers more.

FEATS (AND OTHER OPTIONS) THAT GIVES YOU STATIC +X BONUSESBig question mark. I do like feats, but I think 4th edition had way too many of them, and relied on them as bonus givers way too much. I'd like to see less feats (maybe one per three or four levels), but as stuff that really defines the character (say, changing a wizard to a swordmage) rather than just required +X to keep up with the monsters.

HIT POINTSI've seen a lot of RPGs, but never a good alternative to hit points. If they come up with one, why not.

DEFENSESSimilar to 4th edition. I'd love to see "parry" as new defense.

SKILL CHALLENGESIdea good, but too complex for me as DM.

SKILLS HAS TO BEGotta have them.

NORMAL CHANCE TO HIT60-70%

ALIGNMENT ISStory-based

SAVE OR DIEReserved to some truly awesome high-level powers. I wouldn't mind an Archwizard with a "poof you are dead" spell, but it should be hard to get and expensive to cast. In no way should this be a dominant game mechanic as in 3rd ed.

LevelAssuming "levels" is still a thing in 5E (which is likely), it doesn't matter what the numbers end up being. They're subjective anyways. It could go from 1-50 and not represent any more power than 1-20 does in 4E. So my vote is that the number of levels is a non-issue.

PowersPowers are simply one incarnation of class features, and their value cannot be determined in a vacuum. In 4E, powers are an integral part of the system, and their removal would mean invalidating the entire system. In 3.5E, powers (called spells/psionics/spell-like abilities/supernatural abilities/maneuvers) are less prevalent in that not every class has them, but no less integral to the system. There are MANY RPGs out there, and 5E could be among them, that don't have any direct analogue to powers, and they don't suffer for it. So I'm neutral on powers until such time as I have more information on the system, at which point, if powers are a thing, I imagine they'll be a good thing.

Vanciant [sic] SystemStrictly and vehemently against. I've never liked it, and never will. Each new edition is an opportunity to move further and further away from that design, and I felt betrayed when the developers said they were doing away with it in 4E, and it wasn't COMPLETELY done away with.

Class RoleMostly positive. There are systems that don't need class roles (or indeed, classes at all), but I don't think D&D is one of them. Class roles don't necessarily have to be fixed, though. After all, the 4E fighter is both a striker and a defender, and the druid is both a controller and a leader. If each class has an option of two or more roles, I suspect people will whine less.

Magic ItemsI've always wanted to do away with magic items as being mechanically required. Hopefully that will be an option straight out of the box with 5E.

Ability ScoresWhat do you mean?Having them at all? Good.Having the specific six that D&D has always had? Meh. Take it or leave it.Having them be the fundamental statistic that determines your character's effectiveness at everything he does? Not good, and in my opinion, one of the chief failings of 4E. I think that 5E should see a big reduction in the importance of ability scores, but should not do away with them altogether.

A lot of ClassesDepends on what the classes represent, mechanically. Either way, we're GOING to see a lot of classes, because it's profitable to do so. Also, even if you don't use all the classes, it doesn't hurt to have them as options. I see no reason to NOT want more classes.

A lot of RacesLike with classes, I see no reason to say that more is worse, even if more isn't better.

Ability Scores for RacesThis aspect of the game's design CANNOT be evaluated without context. Obviously, race should have SOME effect on ability scores, but how much is determined by how important ability scores are. I would not be opposed to racial ability score modifiers being removed, but I'd rather see the importance of ability scores being drastically reduced instead.

Character Options with static bonusesI see no reason, without further context from the system as a whole, to say that this is a bad thing, as long as they aren't "must-have" options.

Hit PointsWhile I'd personally like to see them go, it's not because I think they're a bad design. It's because I think too many people have misconceptions about WHAT they are, and what they're supposed to represent. Moving to a wounds system of some sort might aid in that, but might dramatically affect the tone of the game.

Healing SurgesLike a lot of these, it's impossible to evaluate this mechanic in a vacuum. In 4E, it was good (necessary, even). In other editions, it would not be a good idea.

DefensesI would like to see rolls for hitting/missing go the way of the dodo, so I'm going to say that defenses should come in the form of damage resistance or some other mitigating factor.

Skill ChallengesI could take or leave this one. On the one hand, I don't need rules to help my group roleplay, but on the other hand, having skill challenges does help keep people from saying that you can't roleplay in the system (mind you, it doesn't stop them altogether, it just helps). I suppose I'm in favor of skill challenges overall.

SkillsIt would be refreshing to see skills become more important, but great care must be taken in ensuring that they are equally important. Not like in 3.5E where Tumble was all-powerful in combat and Profession was never used.

Normal Chance to HitLike I said, I'd like to do away with attack rolls altogether, so I'll say 100%. In reality, it's all just math, so any number could become acceptable. Hitting more is fun, though, so put me down for 75%+.

Alignment IsNon-existent in my game.

Save or DieIs part of what made 3.5E casters overpowered. It's a horrible, horrible idea and has no place in any modern RPG system that cares anything about balance.

LEVEL 1-20POWERS BAD -ishVANCIANT SYSTEM BADCLASS ROLES GOOD MAGIC ITEMS HAS TO BE MECHANICALLY NOT IMPORTANT ABILITIES SCORES GOOD - however, I'd like the actual number to be more than just generating a bonus. Otherwise, why not just have the stats be -1 to +5 to start? (because that wouldn't look at all like dnd I'm guessing)A LOT OF CLASSES BAD A LOT OF RACES GOOD ABILITY SCORES FOR RACES YESFEATS (AND OTHER OPTIONS) THAT GIVES YOU STATIC +X BONUSES GOOD - for skills BAD - for combat (must haves of + to hit feats)HIT POINTS GOOD - not really, but I don't see getting rid of themHEALING SURGES GREAT!- a great innovation of 4th. Surges should be a resource with several outlets, (activating items, power attacks, etc)DEFENSES Any thought to opposed rolls?

SKILL CHALLENGES BAD - skills worked fine they way they were before, and should meld into and out of combat seamlesslySKILLS HAS TO BE IMPORTANT - if its just fluff, why give it a number? NORMAL CHANCE TO HIT 50% AS NOW - maybe 60%?ALIGNMENT IS abstainSAVE OR DIE BAD

Preferably with Dungeon Masters Guides and Player's Handbooks to accompany them. The reason for this being is that many groups never get past heroic tier. Most of our campaigns end around level 8 or 9, and all of this extra stuff for paragon and epic never sees play. It is wasting space in our books. I am using 4th edition examples, but the same is true of our extensive experience with 3.5. This way, the books can be released in waves, and picking up the set of Paragon books for your level 10 characters would be an event for both the players and the DMs. I know I am sick of ending up on the pages with Orcus and Lolth, knowing that I will never get to play them...

POWERS

GOOD - But they need to be modular, so that groups who do not like them do not need to play with them. The game must still operate without them.

VANCIANT SYSTEM

BAD - There needs to be some way of having to conserve ones resources as you get deeper into the dungeon, but I think that a wizard that knows the fireball spell should always be able to cast it. If vancian magic was to reappear, it should be done as a points buy system, similar to the way DMs spend XP to build encounters in 4th.

CLASS ROLES

GOOD - Good for the health and balance of the game, but I feel like many players were unhappy with how they felt forced to pick a role. Ideally, a class should be the result of the confluence of Power Source and Role, as is the case with 4th, but I think players should be free to define the concept of their character within that construct. For example:

The Character Concept is: NecromancerThe Necromancer could be concepted as an Arcane Controller, a Divine Striker, a Primal Leader, a Martial Defender.

Alternatively - The Role/Source combination is: Divine LeaderBy all means, suggest that the concept of Runepriests, Clerics and Paladins make good Divine Leaders, and even provide guides to making those characters, but don't restrict players by saying that they must play one of those characters to fill this role.

I guess what I am really after is making reskinning not only allowed, but encouraged. Players can share the stories of how they made a Psionic Controller concepted as a Necromancer, and other players will be intrigued to find out how it played.

What this requires to implement is Power Bleed, and a hell of a lot of it. Powers meant for Strikers should be available to all Strikers, and powers meant for Arcane characters should be available to all Arcane characters. This will cut down the number of powers per book, while still allowing each niche to feel special and enabling organic cross-classing.

MAGIC ITEMS HAS TO BE MECHANICALLY

NOT IMPORTANT - 4th edition was well balanced, but it did place a lot of pressure on the DM to drop the right loot at the right time. I would rather the mechanical balance of characters did not hinge on their equipment, and the DM was free to give interesting and unique wondrous and magical items as true rewards rather than out of a twisted sense of obligation. Also, Longsword +5 = bad. I would rather there was a ubiquitous use of naming, or just do away with straight +X bonuses altogether in favour of more unique effects.

ABILITIES SCORES

GOOD - There is a lot of scope for basing more mechanics off these, which has been discussed in depth in Legends & Lore. I liked the direction those discussions were going.

A LOT OF CLASSES

GOOD - For a lack of a more appropriate response. I believe to some extent that classes are obsolete, or relegated to fluff. I have answered this fully under CLASS ROLES.

A LOT OF RACES

GOOD - A character's race goes a long way towards originality. I liked the races presented in supplements like Heroes of Shadow and Heroes of the Feywild. I also would be a big fan of a Savage Species book for 5th, which would give you fantastic race options for starting at Heroic, Paragon or Epic. That way you could state catagorically that the player who wants to be a mindflayer simply can't until they are ready to build a Paragon character.

As an aside, I would be in favour of an option for players to roll a new character at the beginning of each tier, even in an established campaign.

ABILITY SCORES FOR RACES

BAD - I do not want to be forced either to play a certain race to be effective with my chosen character, or not to play a certain race because I will be hamstrung. Rather, I would like the racial descriptions to state, for example, that Gnomes are usually more Intelligent and Charismatic than other races, and let the characters assign their ability scores as they see fit. They may find their Gnome has high Intelligence, but this gives them an unnattractive ego resulting in a low Charisma score. The game should be rebalanced to account for this lack of bonuses, and players may never again fret that their Gnome Paladin's Intelligence bonus goes to waste.

FEATS (AND OTHER OPTIONS) THAT GIVES YOU STATIC +X BONUSES

BAD - +X should be done with the 1/2 level mechanic of 4th, and or Inherent Bonuses as you level up. +X is ugly and bad.

HIT POINTS

GOOD - I haven't heard any arguments against them, so as far as I can see the status quo wins out. I will say that they should remain connected with Constitution, and that you should gain a static number of them each time you level up. I do not yet know if this number is the same for each character, or if it should be worked out based on the character's constitution modifier or score.

HEALING SURGES

GOOD - I don't know about the name, but I like the way that Second Wind functions in 4th. As far as using them for all healing, I think there should be a way to have the healer's skill in Heal, or proficiency with Healing magic matter more in terms of the amount of healing given. I like that the characters can use Healing Surges as resources for more than just healing. Perhaps they could be reconcepted as vital energy, and a cleric-like character could use them to Turn Undead. Characters could expend them like Action Points, or have them drained by enemies. I guess they would be a universal currency, sort of like the Inspiration Points of the 3.5 Factotum class from Dungeonscape.

DEFENSES

AS AC - Rolling high to hit a target is now a key part of the game, and 4th's treatment of the Will, Reflex and Fortitude defenses was a major breakthrough. Stick to that.

SKILL CHALLENGES

UNDECIDED - I have yet to experience a successful one, but they still intrigue me in concept. However, I believe an overhaul to skills, and also to XP, as I suggest, may render them obsolete.

SKILLS HAS TO BE

IMPORTANT - Players should feel that investing in skills is worthwhile, which is why I advocate the Novice-Grandmaster system of skill training. If climbing up onto a 10ft cliff is a Journeyman ranked challenge for Climb (or Athletics), then a character who is a Novice at Climbing should make a check, the Journeyman Climber can do it fine, while the Grandmaster Climbing Monk should use that ledge as the push off point for scaling the entire mountain. There should also be a rank for impossible, where epic characters can make a check...

NORMAL CHANCE TO HIT

50% AS NOW - This should be the baseline. DMs should feel free to run harder monsters and encounters if that is what the players want. Just bump the monsters up a few levels if the need arises.

ALIGNMENT IS

FLUFF - Very important fluff. The old alignment system of Lawful-Chaotic, Good-Evil, should return, but it should not impose mechanical restrictions on the characters. The paladin's moral quandary becomes much more compelling when they have no mechanical downside for taking the "questionable" option. This removes the metagame restrictions of not performing actions because of a fear of losing one's class features. Alignment is and always will be an important part of understanding the D&D universe, to understand where NPCs and Monsters are coming from, and to give players a baseline for thier character's worldview.

SAVE OR DIE

BAD - I do not want my character to be extinguished in one unlucky roll. If players want a hardcore game with the deadliness ramped up to 11, then a module should be created to cater for them, but I am not one of those players.

OTHER CONCERNS OR CHANGES I WOULD MAKE

XP

The system of levelling up once a certain amount of XP is reached is almost obsolete with 4th. All of my PCs level up at the same time, and I often just round their XP up to the next level as quest XP if they are close enough. I may as well ask them every 4 encounters or so if they are ready to level, or have each level up after a particularly tough boss fight. New characters to join the party should always start on the same XP total as the other characters, and they should never have different totals. This ensures a level playing field. This may require an overhaul to my favourite part of 4th, DM encounter design, but that can work on a purely points buy based system if required.

MONSTER & NPC STATS VS PC STATS

4th is wonderful to DM because encounter design is so easy, mainly due to the distinction between PC stat blocks and Monster stat blocks. This simply needs to be kept, but streamlined. The number of powers must be significantly reduced, and similar powers for monsters and PCs should be made the same. A Fireball should always be a Fireball, and Invisibility should always be Invisibility. This is good news for players too, as there should be achievable ways of gaining the signature abilities of monsters, and vice versa. The Stoneskin Contingency of the 3.5 era NPC wizard is once again feared, and the dwarf barbarian can relish his new pair of Bulletteskin Gloves that grant him burrowing. This should also allow for easy DM monster design, something that was conspicuously absent in 4th.

FEATS

Should be made modular like powers.

CHARACTER CONCEPTS

The core books should have a Character Concept for each Power Source/Role combination, with the iconic titles of the basic classes, such as Elf Ranger, Human Fighter, Halfling Thief, etc. Basically like D&D Essentials. These characters are basically premade characters with all the choices already made, and the game should be able to play straight out of the box like this. Character creation will involve coming up with a Character Concept, then choosing the best, or most interesting, way of representing and building that character using the Role/Power Source combinations.

If I wanted to build a Stealthy Assassin, for example, chances are I will be building a striker, so I would choose some cool powers and/or feats from the striker list. However, I also get to choose where he gets his power from. He may use magical study or ability to stay undetected or become a more efficient killer, in which case I would pick from the Arcane list. If, on the other hand, he was an agent of a god's wrath in the mortal realm, I would likely choose him some divine powers and/or feats. This way, people get to build the characters they want to build, without having to feel restricted by a draconian class structure.

As an exercise, perhaps think about how these concepts could be implemented: A loyal bodyguard, a tribal medicine man, a ruthless bountyhunter, a benevolent thief, or an eccentric inventor.

Preferably with Dungeon Masters Guides and Player's Handbooks to accompany them. The reason for this being is that many groups never get past heroic tier. Most of our campaigns end around level 8 or 9, and all of this extra stuff for paragon and epic never sees play. It is wasting space in our books. I am using 4th edition examples, but the same is true of our extensive experience with 3.5. This way, the books can be released in waves, and picking up the set of Paragon books for your level 10 characters would be an event for both the players and the DMs. I know I am sick of ending up on the pages with Orcus and Lolth, knowing that I will never get to play them...

Do you realize how many people would shout "Cash grabbing, greedy, soulless WotC!" and swear off of the game just for this? To play through level 30 would REQUIRE 3 books for the players, and 6 more for the DM.

LEVEL 1-20 This 1-30POWERS GOOD BAD ThisVANCIANT SYSTEM GOOD Hmmm I'd go with good over bad, but is mediocre an option? BADCLASS ROLES GOOD BAD - As they currently exist. Could they be good? Quite possibly, but not as 4e did it.MAGIC ITEMS HAS TO BE MECHANICALLY IMPORTANT NOT IMPORTANT This!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! x1000000000000000000000000000000ABILITIES SCORES GOOD Necessary BADA LOT OF CLASSES GOOD Again, I'm in the middle, but I'm for lots of options so good. BAD A LOT OF RACES GOOD As stated above. BADABILITY SCORES FOR RACES YES This. It helps differentiate a human from a half orc. NOFEATS (AND OTHER OPTIONS) THAT GIVES YOU STATIC +X BONUSES GOOD - Good to have them. BAD HIT POINTS GOOD - Necessary. BADHEALING SURGES GOOD BAD - Beyond terrible. Seriously !@#$ this.DEFENSES AS AC - Keep with the classic AS DAMAGE RESISTANCESKILL CHALLENGES GOOD BAD - As they currently existSKILLS HAS TO BE IMPORTANT - Midline. If we have skills, they need to be important. But I wouldn't lose sleep if they did away with skills. NOT IMPORTANT NORMAL CHANCE TO HIT 50% AS NOW - THIS. MORE LIKE 75% ALIGNMENT IS MECHANICAL FLUFF - DefinitelySAVE OR DIE GOOD - We need more lethality in the game. BAD

Preferably with Dungeon Masters Guides and Player's Handbooks to accompany them. The reason for this being is that many groups never get past heroic tier. Most of our campaigns end around level 8 or 9, and all of this extra stuff for paragon and epic never sees play. It is wasting space in our books. I am using 4th edition examples, but the same is true of our extensive experience with 3.5. This way, the books can be released in waves, and picking up the set of Paragon books for your level 10 characters would be an event for both the players and the DMs. I know I am sick of ending up on the pages with Orcus and Lolth, knowing that I will never get to play them...

Do you realize how many people would shout "Cash grabbing, greedy, soulless WotC!" and swear off of the game just for this? To play through level 30 would REQUIRE 3 books for the players, and 6 more for the DM.

I am just suggesting what I would want to see, as is the purpose of this thread. I would rather use everything in the books I buy, than have to filter through the paragon and epic stuff to find heroic. I suppose it wouldn't be as much of an issue if they arranged the books by tier instead of actually having different books, but I figured they could use the space to add more content. Also, you'll find that players and dms already need to shell out a lot, MMII, MMIII, DMGII, PHBII and PHBIII. That makes 8 total with the core books. I am proposing 9, with the content arguably distributed more logically. Alternatively, make everything available as PDF in addition to books, and sell them cheap as chips. You seem to be concerned with the price of books rather than the actual suggested change, and that is a different issue.

Great Idea Leichenreiter, heres my 2 centsLEVEL1-30 , I have enjoyed the differnt tiers in 4ePOWERS GOOD, I dont think i could go back to a powerless rpg system. This is what won me over in 4e and DND in generalVANCIANT SYSTEMBAD CLASS ROLES GOOD, I really enjoy class rolls myselfMAGIC ITEMS HAS TO BE MECHANICALLYNOT IMPORTANTABILITIES SCORES GOOD A LOT OF CLASSES GOOD, A MUST!!A LOT OF RACES GOOD , Another Must!!ABILITY SCORES FOR RACES YES HIT POINTS GOOD, Is there any other way?HEALING SURGES GOOD , Great!DEFENSES AS ACSKILL CHALLENGES GOOD , Some Changes need be made, but a great ideaSKILLS HAS TO BE IMPORTANT, More Skills?NORMAL CHANCE TO HIT 60% ?ALIGNMENT IS MECHANICALSAVE OR DIEBAD

LEVEL 1-20POWERS Abstain (whatever works)VANCIAN SYSTEM BADCLASS ROLES GOOD MAGIC ITEMS HAS TO BE MECHANICALLY NOT IMPORTANT ABILITIES SCORES GOOD A LOT OF CLASSES BAD A LOT OF RACES BADABILITY SCORES FOR RACES NOFEATS (AND OTHER OPTIONS) THAT GIVES YOU STATIC +X BONUSES BAD HIT POINTS GOOD HEALING SURGES GOOD DEFENSES AS ACSKILL CHALLENGES BAD SKILLS HAS TO BE IMPORTANT NORMAL CHANCE TO HIT MORE LIKE 75% ALIGNMENT IS FLUFF SAVE OR DIE BAD

LEVEL L1-30POWERS GOODVANCIANT SYSTEM BADCLASS ROLES GOOD MAGIC ITEMS HAS TO BE MECHANICALLY NOT IMPORTANT ABILITIES SCORES GOOD A LOT OF CLASSES GOOD A LOT OF RACES GOOD ABILITY SCORES FOR RACES YESFEATS (AND OTHER OPTIONS) THAT GIVES YOU STATIC +X BONUSES GOODHIT POINTS GOOD HEALING SURGES GOOD DEFENSES AS ACSKILL CHALLENGES GOOD SKILLS HAS TO BE IMPORTANT NORMAL CHANCE TO HIT MORE LIKE 75% ALIGNMENT IS FLUFF SAVE OR DIE BAD

powersGood. This way characters do not, effectively, get weaker and have less options the longer they are adventurning. They could use a bit more tweaking though.

vanciantsystemBad.

magicitems has to be mechanically Not important.

abilitiesscoresGood.

a lot of classes6-8 basic classes with early specializations and archtypes (level 10 or so) would be ideal, IMO.

a lot of racesGood, but only if they're fully fleshed out and realized. Don't just have filler races.

ability scores for racesGood.

feats (and other options) that gives you static +x bonusesBad.

hit pointsGood.

healing surgesDouble edged sword, but leaning more towards bad. Has completely gimped healing and is the single most restrictive element in adventuring. Surges for self-healing are great, but no magical ability should be using a healing surge. Ever. Same with potions. Healing surges should be minimal and a way for characters to pull their own butts out of a fire on occasion (few and far between - like action points). Traditional healing methods should be reverted to their earlier incarnations.

defensesAC - Good. Everything else, bad unless they're buffed up a lot. 3rd edition saving throws > 4th edition defenses, IMO. Defenses always seem to be far too low compared to the attacks. In Encounters, when any monster attacks Fort, Reflex, or Will, they hit at least 90% of the time because the attack rolls are almost always 21+ against defenses of around 15-17. Better yet, with the exception of AC, have defenses as bonuses to d20 rolls.

skill challengesFantastic.

skills has to beImportant. 4e compressing them was good.

normal chance to hit80%

Alignment isFor role play.

Save or DieBad.

I'd also like to see combat not take an hour or more every encounter, like 4e. Kinda ruins a session if you can only get one or two encounters in. Less if you role play. Some nights it's fine, but not every session can span several hours. Sometimes, the best sessions only go 2 hours or so.

LEVEL 1-30 POWERS GOOD and BAD. Not every class should have powers. Fighter types and spell casters are different.VANCIANT SYSTEM BAD I've use a point count system but every class needs an at-will ability. Magic missiles for a wizard. CLASS ROLES BADMAGIC ITEMS HAS TO BE MECHANICALLY NOT IMPORTANT ABILITIES SCORES GOOD - That's DnDA LOT OF CLASSES GOOD - But I like "sub-classes" rather than distinct classes. Wizard, Sorcerer and Warlock are aspects of the same thing as are Fighter, Ranger, Paladin. Build them like that.A LOT OF RACES GOOD but what's a lot? Nobody plays humans in 4e. ABILITY SCORES FOR RACES YES but they should net to zero. A giant with a +4 to Str should have a -4 to some other ability score.FEATS (AND OTHER OPTIONS) THAT GIVES YOU STATIC +X BONUSES BAD HIT POINTS GOOD HEALING SURGES BAD - I would replace with a cleric at-will powerDEFENSES AS AC - The 4 defenses work for me.SKILL CHALLENGES GOOD but it they need workSKILLS HAVE TO BE IMPORTANT - but some skills should belong to particular classes.NORMAL CHANCE TO HIT 50% AS NOW ALIGNMENT IS FLUFF - Go back to the old Good, Neutral, Evil/ Lawful, Neutral, Chaotic paradigmSAVE OR DIE BAD - Very bad actually. As a DM, I don't want my PC's to die because of a bad die roll.

These are all mechanics questions. The #1 benefit of 4e was the balance between classes. The #1 complaint is that it was too much about mechanics and less about the roleplaying. Combat needs to be quicker. An encounter should take 30 minutes at most at all levels.

MAGIC ITEMS HAS TO BE MECHANICALLYNOT IMPORTANT (valued, but not needed. No +X items, period)

ABILITIES SCORESGOOD

A LOT OF CLASSESBAD (I would prefer classes be archetypal only -- maybe four or five -- with everything else as a feature-set build)

A LOT OF RACESBAD (by this I mean races for the sake of races is bad.

ABILITY SCORES FOR RACESNO (races should have features, not stats)

FEATS (AND OTHER OPTIONS) THAT GIVES YOU STATIC +X BONUSESBAD (I initially said good, but this just leads to feat taxes or default must haves)

HIT POINTSGOOD (it has always worked and is an element that separates D&D from health point systems)

HEALING SURGESGOOD (now to just remove the healer as a party necessity)

DEFENSESAS AC (4e got defenses right)

SKILL CHALLENGESBAD (at least as we currently understand them)

SKILLS HAS TO BEIMPORTANT (I want skills to be important and useful; 4e came really close to perfect)

NORMAL CHANCE TO HIT75% (but only if we remove +X magic items and feats)

ALIGNMENT ISFLUFF (if it has to be present at all)

SAVE OR DIEBAD (very bad. completely bad.)

Here are the PHB essentia, in my opinion:

Three Basic Rules (p 11)

Power Types and Usage (p 54)

Skills (p178-179)

Feats (p 192)

Rest and Recovery (p 263)

All of Chapter 9 [Combat] (p 264-295)

A player needs to read the sections for building his or her character -- race, class, powers, feats, equipment, etc. But those are PC-specific. The above list is for everyone, regardless of the race or class or build or concept they are playing.

LEVEL 1-20POWERS BADVANCIANT SYSTEM GOODCLASS ROLES GOODMAGIC ITEMS HAS TO BE MECHANICALLY IMPORTANTABILITIES SCORES GOODA LOT OF CLASSES GOOD A LOT OF RACES GOODABILITY SCORES FOR RACES YES FEATS (AND OTHER OPTIONS) THAT GIVES YOU STATIC +X BONUSES GOODHIT POINTS GOOD HEALING SURGES BADDEFENSES AS ACSKILL CHALLENGESBADSKILLS HAVE TO BE NOT IMPORTANTNORMAL CHANCE TO HIT 50% ALIGNMENT IS MECHANICAL SAVE OR DIE GOOD

I do not think that character development over time needs to spread out over 30 levels. It seems to be much easier IMO to make every level count with just 20 levels to go. And every level should mean something.

POWERS GOOD

Very good, in fact. I also like the fact that the existing powers in 4E have a narrative element and that the fluff text is supposed to be changed into whatever I like.I also connect the word "balance" with the word "power". I connected the word "inbalance" with the word "spell" in 3e. I like balance. A lot.

VANCIANT SYSTEM BAD

This idea should rot in it's grave, I think.

CLASS ROLES GOOD

But classes should not be entirely fixed to their roles, but should always have a second role.

MAGIC ITEMS HAS TO BE MECHANICALLY NOT IMPORTANT

My character should not need a +x item to be able to combat an opponent effectively.

ABILITIES SCORES GOOD

And they all should mean something, not just the two main attributes.

A LOT OF CLASSES GOOD

if they make sense

A LOT OF RACES GOOD

ABILITY SCORES FOR RACES YES

but no -2s, please

FEATS (AND OTHER OPTIONS) THAT GIVES YOU STATIC +X BONUSES BAD

HIT POINTS GOOD

if they mean more than "wounds" and can be explored narratively.

HEALING SURGES GOOD

DEFENSES AS AC

SKILL CHALLENGES BAD

because I was unable to play them without winging it. It just is not a solid mechanic.And I would like to have a lot of solid mechanics for stuff to do outside of combat!

LEVEL Dosn't matter, the system can scale either way (abstain)POWERS GOODVANCIANT SYSTEM GOOD CLASS ROLES GOOD (they will be there period, why not admit it?)MAGIC ITEMS HAS TO BE MECHANICALLY NOT IMPORTANT (assuming you mean to the math of the system)ABILITIES SCORES GOOD A LOT OF CLASSES BAD A LOT OF RACES BADABILITY SCORES FOR RACES YESFEATS (AND OTHER OPTIONS) THAT GIVES YOU STATIC +X BONUSES BAD HIT POINTS GOOD HEALING SURGES GOOD DEFENSES AS ACSKILL CHALLENGES BAD SKILLS HAS TO BE IMPORTANT NORMAL CHANCE TO HIT MORE LIKE 75% ALIGNMENT IS MECHANICALSAVE OR DIE BAD (make it save or suck for a round or two and I'm fine)

• LEVEL Lv: 1-30• POWERS GOOD, but I would add more abilities dependent on the class (such as all the "wild knacks" that a leader druid can choose or the cantrips of a wizard, but for all the classes: small abilities that can help a lot a role-player)• VANCIANT SYSTEM BAD (well, I supposed that the power system is an evolution of the Vanciant one, and that the Dailies now are something like what the old spells were once)• CLASS ROLES GOOD (question: is it possible to create even more roles?)• MAGIC ITEMS HAS TO BE MECHANICALLY NOT IMPORTANT • ABILITIES SCORES GOOD, but I would like MORE SECONDARY ABILITIES for each class; I would like to play a charismatic and clever Wild Sorcerer, instead of being obliged to raise up my Dex any time I can, and I want it to be important for my spells. Maybe there should be one primary ability, and all the other abilities are important secondaries that give rise to different characters (a charismatic and clever sorcerer would be more controllerish than a charismatic and wise one, that could have some healing spells in his repertoire) • A LOT OF CLASSES GOOD, but subclasses are very important too• A LOT OF RACES GOOD • ABILITY SCORES FOR RACES YES• FEATS (AND OTHER OPTIONS) THAT GIVES YOU STATIC +X BONUSES VERY BAD• HIT POINTS I don't know; I would say no. • HEALING SURGES GOOD • DEFENSES GOOD• SKILL CHALLENGES GOOD • SKILLS HAS TO BE IMPORTANT • NORMAL CHANCE TO HIT 50% • ALIGNMENT IS FLUFF • SAVE OR DIE GOOD

LEVEL 1-20POWERS BADVANCIANT SYSTEM BADCLASS ROLES BADMAGIC ITEMS HAS TO BE MECHANICALLY NOT IMPORTANT ABILITIES SCORES GOOD A LOT OF CLASSES BAD A LOT OF RACES BADABILITY SCORES FOR RACES YESFEATS (AND OTHER OPTIONS) THAT GIVES YOU STATIC +X BONUSES GOODHIT POINTS GOOD HEALING SURGES BADDEFENSES AS ACSKILL CHALLENGES BAD SKILLS HAS TO BE IMPORTANT NORMAL CHANCE TO HIT 50% AS NOW ALIGNMENT IS FLUFF SAVE OR DIE GOOD - Occasionally.

I'd like it to diverge away from 4th edition, and be more like the classic game in a lot of the feel for it. It's not that I don't feel that 4th edition doesn't have a purpose, but I would like it to be more in feel closer to 2nd or 3rd.

That being said, here's my suggestions:

LEVEL: 1-20I would prefer a game going back to the 1-20 scale initially, but instead of it being broken up into two tiers like 4th edition, I think it might be better broken up into 4. 21-30 can be an add-on for those who want it.

POWERS:Good with modification (or bad and needs to be changed)

I think that the thoughts behind the powers theme were well intentioned, but the exectution was not done right.I would suggest that when abilities are designed, that they can be something that could be trained and purchased, rather than the limited amount of powers that one gets from 4th edition. Comb over old fighting manuals for actual techniques for the fighters, and have spells be something that one can learn, but at a slower rate than 3rd.The amount of abilities that one can acrue can be based upon the power level of the campaign (i.e. set by the DM), and you would not have to give up the ones that you learned earlier.

VANCIANT SYSTEM: Bad (but had it's purpose)

I don not know that I especially like the vancian system, but it did have the benefit of keeping the higher level abilities away from the starting characters. Make the magic system actually have a cost (endurance, fatigue, constitution, or some depletable resource) that the spellcasters have to expend to cast spells. Maybe as they get higher level, the amount that they had to spend on lower level spells can diminish, and cantrip level abilities should be relatively cheap.

CLASS ROLES: Bad (but for a reason)

Class roles tend to force people into those roles, and limit the roleplaying capabilities for those classes. Maybe a person wants to be a tactician Barbarian, but with all of the roles that are required, it doesn't support his striker role in 4th edition. Same could be said about any character that wants to be a juxtaposition of class and normally not beneficial stat or race. It weakens the RP by forcing people into roles.

MAGIC ITEMS HAS TO BE MECHANICALLY: Not important

I can't stress how much I feel this. Magic should not be required. A game system should allow any type of game, be it high magic, low magic, or no magic. having magic be required for the characters to "keep up" isn't good system design.

ABILITIES SCORES: Good

I like a base score for Strength, Dexterity, and all of the others. I would also like to have more things tied off of a base score roll.

A LOT OF CLASSES: Good, for variety

As long as you can fill the need for the character concepts, you could even do this with a system similar to a balanced skills and powers from 2nd edition, you could get away with as low as 4 or 5 though. Just have the base classes as skeletons, and allow people to put the things on it that they want, to fit their character idea.

A LOT OF RACES: Good, but limit in core.

Having lots of choices for races if good, making them somewhat balanced (I'm looking at you Dwarves and Small Races) is even better. I might limit it in core, but that would mainly leave you the ability to allow add more when you add new monsters. It would also make it easier when it comes time to make characters, as people can pick from the books that are campaign legal.

ABILITY SCORES FOR RACES: Yes

Some races should be better at some things than ohers. It makes a lot of sense that dwarves have a higher constitution than elves, for example. Now this difference can be achieved by other methods, but ability scores are one of the the easiest ways of doing so.

A way to signify that someone who has special training has a better than average ability to do something is good. The way that it was accomplished was not. Perhaps allow an open training system, that allows people to learn new abilities in chosen focuses as they increase in experience.

HIT POINTS: Good

Only because it isn't difficult to deal with, and it simplifies combat. As an option to the system, possibly using a location based damage system to create more reality?

HEALING SURGES: Bad (in practice)

Limiting the amount of healing one can do in a day, without rest is a good thing. A flat percentage of their full health might have been better.

DEFENSES: Armor Class; Bad

Armor would be better suited as a damage reducer Any hit that fails to penetrate the DR of the armor is easily viewed as not getting past the armor. Missing might be judged as Base AC +Dex+Deflection, etc... This should also factor into having to repair armor at intervals.

SKILL CHALLENGES: Good concept, might need reworked.

The idea of skill challenges is a good way to keep skills relevant. I can also reward people choosing skills based on their character's backgrounds.

SKILLS HAVE TO BE: Important

I would modify skills however, to not increase when a person goes up in level. I would modify it so that the skills go up with use. A town Blacksmith doesn't go out to slay dragons or ogres, but they can get darn good with that hammer in their forge from repetition.

NORMAL CHANCE TO HIT: 50%

Both sides whould have about a 50% chance of success, base. Increases in capability or tactics can modify this for good or bad, but the chance should start at 50%.

ALIGNMENT IS: Both

Alignment should be mechanical where it is required (there should be beings of pure evil, pure chaos, pure law, pure good, and pure neutrality). But for most concerns, alignment shouldn't be the be all and end all. If you tie your character concept to alignment, no matter the class, you chould probably have some repercussion from violating that alignment (maybe a morale penalty to actions?).

SAVE OR DIE: Bad

Let's just nip this in the bud right here. Save or Die may have it's place. It should be VERY expensive to use something like this, and it shouldn't be anywhere near a definite win proposition. Same thing with Save or Suck, to a lesser degree.

To complete the thought, add variety and ability to the combat abilities of fighter types, give them something other than I hit/ roll damage. Increase the value of tactics for normal warfare. Decrease the certainty of Save or Die for anything, make skills advance not from levelling, but from use. Make learning skills a matter of Intelligence, not class. Alignment shouldn't matter as much mechanically, unless you tie it to a theme. You shouldn't have to unlearn what you have learned (I forgot how to Lunge to learn how to perform a Moulinet) to get a new ability. I agree with the OP, things should be based off of a chain or a tier system for learning abilities (Fire-finger, burning hands, flaming sphere, then fireball). This might allow things to be opened up per level that you advance, but it should probably be something that you have to actually pursue. Modularity, as the OP said, is the key.